Reading mode: Light Dark

Sorry Canon, I could no longer wait...

Go to last post
7

70tas

Member
Messages
25
Reaction score
3
I’ve been waiting with baited breath for a G3X MK II and/or a G5X MK II. It has been two years now. I bought a refurbished G7X last year, but was not very happy with the camera operation. The worst accessory in camera utility is the LED in the back. I can’t see it with the sun behind me, and of course if I increase the brightness, there goes the battery. You can actually hear it slurping juice... ;)

Seriously, bad in light, and bad trying to follow an object moving fast across the screen.

So I bought a refurbished G5X this year. What a godsend. Now I can even follow an airplane around, that is if it isn’t too close or going too fast. I can’t get used to the non-tactile and non-synchronized feel of the controls, however. Coming from a 20D, I expect a big barrel to turn so I can zoom; exactly where I want it, and as fast as I want to turn it.

The G5X unfortunately has electronic links, zooming is not fast, nor accurate. And forget about manual focus, unless I’ve missed something. But it is much better than the G7X.

Great, now I have a close up camera, I started looking at the super zoom. G3X is NOT a 25X, it is more a 12X. Sorry, no arguments here, I’ve had enough arguing with my 75-300mm, which was sold as a 10X. I finally figured out why; The lens has a maximum zoom of 300mm. Eye perspective is 50mm, I didn’t make that up. Therefore the 300mm is 6X. Using the 20D which is an APS-C sensor, and multiplying 6X times a cropping factor of 1.6, I get 9.6, roughly 10X. No wonder I couldn’t get close to birds, or airplanes in the sky.

So, I just got an SX-60HS, refurbished, of course. I must say I’m pretty happy. Picture quality has not suffered from what I can see, and I’m half blind anyway. ;).

I looked at both DSLR and DILC’s. The former I would need at least a 400mm lens with 2X adapter, rendering most shots, manually focused. The M’s would require an EF to EOS adapter, a 2X adapter, and a 400mm lens, weighing around three pounds I think. I’m afraid just holding the camera would cause the barrel weight to do obscene things to the little body. And I’d still need to manually focus.

We’ll see what Canon does for us common folk. I’d really like a 30X - 40X G3X MK II, but I don’t think that is going to happen because it will drop camera prices. I understand that the vendors need to make money, I’m not anti-capitalism. As the world turns, and “who loves ya moh babie”...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jim
70tas said:
I’ve been waiting with baited breath for a G3X MK II and/or a G5X MK II. It has been two years now.

I bought a refurbished G7X last year, but was not very happy with the camera operation. The worst accessory in camera utility is the LED in the back. I can’t see it with the sun behind me, and of course if I increase the brightness, there goes the battery. You can actually hear it slurping juice... ;)
Click to expand...
You can top up these cameras with a powerpack while you are having a cup of coffee etc.. or carry a spare. I doubt the Canon is worst than any other small compact and the long press on the info/display button is a very handy way of toggling brightness quicklu.
70tas said:
Seriously, bad in light, and bad trying to follow an object moving fast across the screen.

So I bought a refurbished G5X this year. What a godsend. Now I can even follow an airplane around, that is if it isn’t too close or going too fast. I can’t get used to the non-tactile and non-synchronized feel of the controls, however. Coming from a 20D, I expect a big barrel to turn so I can zoom; exactly where I want it, and as fast as I want to turn it.

The G5X unfortunately has electronic links, zooming is not fast, nor accurate. And forget about manual focus, unless I’ve missed something. But it is much better than the G7X.

Great, now I have a close up camera, I started looking at the super zoom. G3X is NOT a 25X, it is more a 12X.
Click to expand...
The G3X is a 25x camera. No-one has ever said the zoom factor is magnification but it is a common misconception. This is an error on your part and results from lack of understanding and research on the equipment you are buying. Buying the wrong camera for the job required cannot be automatically be attributed to being a fault in the camera or its specifications which are clearly stated and standard practice.
70tas said:
Sorry, no arguments here, I’ve had enough arguing with my 75-300mm, which was sold as a 10X. I finally figured out why; The lens has a maximum zoom of 300mm. Eye perspective is 50mm, I didn’t make that up. Therefore the 300mm is 6X. Using the 20D which is an APS-C sensor, and multiplying 6X times a cropping factor of 1.6, I get 9.6, roughly 10X. No wonder I couldn’t get close to birds, or airplanes in the sky.
Click to expand...
Of course you didn't make it up as most people on this forum will be aware of this. Do not forget that your SX60 starts from an even wider angle than the G3X so you will be getting even less magnification than the zoom factor would imply.
70tas said:
So, I just got an SX-60HS, refurbished, of course. I must say I’m pretty happy. Picture quality has not suffered from what I can see, and I’m half blind anyway. ;).

I looked at both DSLR and DILC’s. The former I would need at least a 400mm lens with 2X adapter, rendering most shots, manually focused. The M’s would require an EF to EOS adapter, a 2X adapter, and a 400mm lens, weighing around three pounds I think. I’m afraid just holding the camera would cause the barrel weight to do obscene things to the little body. And I’d still need to manually focus.

We’ll see what Canon does for us common folk. I’d really like a 30X - 40X G3X MK II, but I don’t think that is going to happen because it will drop camera prices. I understand that the vendors need to make money, I’m not anti-capitalism. As the world turns, and “who loves ya moh babie”...
Click to expand...
Look at the size of the RX10 IV which has the same range of zoom but a faster long end. A 40x zoom on the focal lengths required for these 1" sensor would be enormous or really slow at the long end unless a really large aperture is used. Nothing to do with esoteric theories on capitalism and pricing.

Most of us churn through kit to try and get the camera we really want and probably never get there. I am not particularly defending Canon as I myself may actually swap my G3X for a Panasonic FZ82 rather than a SX60 as I am getting tired of the limited focus modes and a bit more optical reach would be useful even if at the cost of close up quality. As an all rounder the G3X is a great camera and it is what it is but not for everyone.
 
Last edited:
70tas said:
I’ve been waiting with baited breath for a G3X MK II and/or a G5X MK II. It has been two years now. I bought a refurbished G7X last year, but was not very happy with the camera operation. The worst accessory in camera utility is the LED in the back. I can’t see it with the sun behind me, and of course if I increase the brightness, there goes the battery. You can actually hear it slurping juice... ;)

Seriously, bad in light, and bad trying to follow an object moving fast across the screen.

So I bought a refurbished G5X this year. What a godsend. Now I can even follow an airplane around, that is if it isn’t too close or going too fast. I can’t get used to the non-tactile and non-synchronized feel of the controls, however. Coming from a 20D, I expect a big barrel to turn so I can zoom; exactly where I want it, and as fast as I want to turn it.

The G5X unfortunately has electronic links, zooming is not fast, nor accurate. And forget about manual focus, unless I’ve missed something. But it is much better than the G7X.

Great, now I have a close up camera, I started looking at the super zoom. G3X is NOT a 25X, it is more a 12X. Sorry, no arguments here, I’ve had enough arguing with my 75-300mm, which was sold as a 10X. I finally figured out why; The lens has a maximum zoom of 300mm. Eye perspective is 50mm, I didn’t make that up. Therefore the 300mm is 6X. Using the 20D which is an APS-C sensor, and multiplying 6X times a cropping factor of 1.6, I get 9.6, roughly 10X. No wonder I couldn’t get close to birds, or airplanes in the sky.

So, I just got an SX-60HS, refurbished, of course. I must say I’m pretty happy. Picture quality has not suffered from what I can see, and I’m half blind anyway. ;).

I looked at both DSLR and DILC’s. The former I would need at least a 400mm lens with 2X adapter, rendering most shots, manually focused. The M’s would require an EF to EOS adapter, a 2X adapter, and a 400mm lens, weighing around three pounds I think. I’m afraid just holding the camera would cause the barrel weight to do obscene things to the little body. And I’d still need to manually focus.

We’ll see what Canon does for us common folk. I’d really like a 30X - 40X G3X MK II, but I don’t think that is going to happen because it will drop camera prices. I understand that the vendors need to make money, I’m not anti-capitalism. As the world turns, and “who loves ya moh babie”...
Click to expand...
Sounds like you are unhappy about a lot of things. That's too bad for you as I'm sure you will have lots of unhappy experiences with future cameras that don't live up to your OCD-like expectations.

No clue what you are talking about with DSLR having to shoot at "at least" 800mm. Have you ever shot wildlife at 800mm?

Perhaps you should spend more time taking photos and learning about the art of photography than whining about how manufacturers aren't making you happy.
 
Wow. I thought this was a discussion forum. I accept your insults graciously and will strive to get the positive from your message.

And By the way, i will defend your right to speak as you wish to the death if need be. I expect the same of you.

Thank you for your kindness in replying.
 
Just to clarify, I understand what you are saying. All professional lenses leave the zoom factor to the user to calculate. As you said, however, the zoom factor is not magnification.

In the consumer market the vendors are trying to be helpful, and to help themselves, by quoting the zoom factors as magnification. That’s what had me confused until I read a good portion of this forum. (See AMZN), this forum is not only entertaining but educational.

Thank you for your reply. Being able that change panel brightness via a shortcut is a gem.
 
I’ve been a Canon boy since my eLAN IIe. Not about to change now. And I’ll get any car as long as it is a Ford. ;)
 
saaber1 said:
Sounds like you are unhappy about a lot of things. That's too bad for you as I'm sure you will have lots of unhappy experiences with future cameras that don't live up to your OCD-like expectations.

No clue what you are talking about with DSLR having to shoot at "at least" 800mm. Have you ever shot wildlife at 800mm?

Perhaps you should spend more time taking photos and learning about the art of photography than whining about how manufacturers aren't making you happy.
Click to expand...
Wow, the G defenders are out in force. Firstly, I too await a better Canon camera for my particular needs. I also am not into mathematical formula and perceive a zoom range to be as stated. I do want a reasonably good super zoom with a reasonably good 50X zoom range. There I stated the X word. For shame. :-P
 
Graciously said!

Can we now talk a little about options for cameras?

I can understand your wanting 800 mm for wildlife. However, it's hard, and expensive to get there with Canon gear. True, you do get 1.6x magnification through the APS-C sensor's crop factor; but most affordable long lenses are f/5.6 at the long end. Adding a 2x multiplier will give you f/11. Most Canon's won't auto focus at that aperture, so you're looking at a very dim manual focus situation, and a pretty slow shutter speed. Also, the multiplier will degrade the image somewhat. Use of a 1.4x multiplier will give 672 mm and may still allow AF. Years ago I used a 20D (my first DSLR) and played around with combinations to get longer reach.

If you look at the m4/3 cameras from Olympus or Panasonic, the current crop work quite well and produce good images printed at 11 x 14 at ISO 3200. Their crop factor is 2:1. Both Olympus and Panasonic offer lenses that go to 300 or 400 mm, which get you 600 or 800 mm equivalent without using a multiplier, and AF works. Both companies have weather proofed bodies and lenses.

The other option is a superzoom "bridge" camera. I use the Panasonic FZ300 which has a constant f/2.8 lens and 600 mm, equivalent and is weather resistant. It has a 12 MP sensor, and using the EX 8 MP mode, you get 22% more reach for 734 mm, Pretty close to your 800 mm, and it's at f/2.8. That camera gives very nice images up to around ISO 500.

Other possibilities have been mentioned, like the Canon SX60HS, or the Panasonic FZ80. The problem for me with those cameras, is the slow lens at anywhere near full zoom. They will be 2 stops (4x) slower than the FZ300 and are not weather resistant. I'd also include the Nikon P900 is that list. It's big and heavy; but goes to 2000 mm and has a pretty good lens, especially at 800 mm.

My third thought, is one of the superzooms with a 20 MP 1" sensor. I use the Panasonic FZ1000. It "only" zooms to 400 mm; but using the 10 MP EX mode gives 565 mm with very good quality at ISO 1600 with an f/4 aperture, and surprisingly good print quality using iZoom to 2x for 800 mm. Sony's RX10 mk III is a little bigger and heavier, and a lot more expensive; but goes to 600 mm at f/4 and cropping to 10 MP will give 840 mm, still at f/4.

How good are the 1" sensor cameras? When I bought the FZ1000, I was using a Canon 70D with three lenses. Shooting my resolution chart, the FZ1000 gave 20-25% higher resolution figures in lines per mm. Noise at ISO 1600 was comparable. I had calibrated the lenses to the body using AF micro adjust for front to back focus. After several real world comparison shots and a trip to California and Yosemite and Lake Tahoe with the FZ1000, I sold the 70D when I got home. That was in may, 2015, and I have not looked back. I have since bought a Canon G7X II to get the 1" sensor in a pocketable size.
 
saaber1 said:
70tas said:
I’ve been waiting with baited breath for a G3X MK II and/or a G5X MK II. It has been two years now. I bought a refurbished G7X last year, but was not very happy with the camera operation. The worst accessory in camera utility is the LED in the back. I can’t see it with the sun behind me, and of course if I increase the brightness, there goes the battery. You can actually hear it slurping juice... ;)

Seriously, bad in light, and bad trying to follow an object moving fast across the screen.

So I bought a refurbished G5X this year. What a godsend. Now I can even follow an airplane around, that is if it isn’t too close or going too fast. I can’t get used to the non-tactile and non-synchronized feel of the controls, however. Coming from a 20D, I expect a big barrel to turn so I can zoom; exactly where I want it, and as fast as I want to turn it.

The G5X unfortunately has electronic links, zooming is not fast, nor accurate. And forget about manual focus, unless I’ve missed something. But it is much better than the G7X.

Great, now I have a close up camera, I started looking at the super zoom. G3X is NOT a 25X, it is more a 12X. Sorry, no arguments here, I’ve had enough arguing with my 75-300mm, which was sold as a 10X. I finally figured out why; The lens has a maximum zoom of 300mm. Eye perspective is 50mm, I didn’t make that up. Therefore the 300mm is 6X. Using the 20D which is an APS-C sensor, and multiplying 6X times a cropping factor of 1.6, I get 9.6, roughly 10X. No wonder I couldn’t get close to birds, or airplanes in the sky.

So, I just got an SX-60HS, refurbished, of course. I must say I’m pretty happy. Picture quality has not suffered from what I can see, and I’m half blind anyway. ;).

I looked at both DSLR and DILC’s. The former I would need at least a 400mm lens with 2X adapter, rendering most shots, manually focused. The M’s would require an EF to EOS adapter, a 2X adapter, and a 400mm lens, weighing around three pounds I think. I’m afraid just holding the camera would cause the barrel weight to do obscene things to the little body. And I’d still need to manually focus.

We’ll see what Canon does for us common folk. I’d really like a 30X - 40X G3X MK II, but I don’t think that is going to happen because it will drop camera prices. I understand that the vendors need to make money, I’m not anti-capitalism. As the world turns, and “who loves ya moh babie”...
Click to expand...
Sounds like you are unhappy about a lot of things. That's too bad for you as I'm sure you will have lots of unhappy experiences with future cameras that don't live up to your OCD-like expectations.

No clue what you are talking about with DSLR having to shoot at "at least" 800mm. Have you ever shot wildlife at 800mm?

Perhaps you should spend more time taking photos and learning about the art of photography than whining about how manufacturers aren't making you happy.
Click to expand...
Why do you post things like that? It's a camera forum: not one in which needless insults are to be tossed around. If this is all you can offer, then kindly say nothing.

Jim
 
It's not just Canon, new compact camera models are down industry-wide.

Source: CIPA
Source: CIPA
 
DonA2 said:
saaber1 said:
Sounds like you are unhappy about a lot of things. That's too bad for you as I'm sure you will have lots of unhappy experiences with future cameras that don't live up to your OCD-like expectations.

No clue what you are talking about with DSLR having to shoot at "at least" 800mm. Have you ever shot wildlife at 800mm?

Perhaps you should spend more time taking photos and learning about the art of photography than whining about how manufacturers aren't making you happy.
Click to expand...
Wow, the G defenders are out in force. Firstly, I too await a better Canon camera for my particular needs. I also am not into mathematical formula and perceive a zoom range to be as stated. I do want a reasonably good super zoom with a reasonably good 50X zoom range. There I stated the X word. For shame. :-P
Click to expand...
But a criticism of the G3X was that it was not a 25x zoom because it was only 15x magnification. This hardly applies to Canon exclusively. Superzoom cameras like the Canon SX60 and FZ82 start from even wider angles than the G3X at 21mm and 20mm equivalents which reduces the apparent magnification even further.

Are you sure you want 50x zoom or do you want 50x magnification from the nominal 50mm optical neutral point? Difficult to see how someone can ascertain the actual reach of these cameras without a bit of mathematics.

Even the amazing Nikon P900 which is advertised at 83x optical zoom at 2000mm has only 40x magnification.

The OP did rather imply this was a specifically Canon problem in terms of stated zoom so it would be difficult not to challenge this without necessarily making one a G defender.
 
Thank you. I am a part time wannabe, so it will take me some time to study your email, so I can fully understand it. Yes, I was tired of the bulk and weight, that is why I got the G5X and SX60. The SX60 gives me 26X magnification, sold as 65X (factor). 26X is a lot better than I had with the 20D 300mm, even at 1.6 crop. And 20% less pixels in a 1 2/3 sensor, should allow for a better quality. I’ve looked at samples here on the forum and they appear pretty good. (Since I’m not an expert, I can’t speak definitevily. Also just got an over shoulder bag, put everything in it, and guess what? My shoulders didn’t hurt.
 
Jumping in, the SX60 is 26X at the 50mm eye-point-of-view. (Or what’s it called...)

I’m concerned a 50X magnification would not be very useful at the far end due to atmospheric haze. I’m going to try my SX60 at 26X (or 65X as Canon refers to it) and I will post some samples.

Tas
 
justmeMN said:
It's not just Canon, new compact camera models are down industry-wide.

Source: CIPA
Source: CIPA
Click to expand...
I can’t speak for the camera industry. But it seems to be the same thing plaguing the computer industry.

1. Equipment lasts longer
2. Manufacturers order in bulk; case in point the Digic 4+ and 6; Canon must have a warehouse full of them.
3. For some reason marketing prefers to create several models with very few differences between them. Again, in the G series, there are too many models with too few differences in both features and pricing.

4. This one needed some extra space around it; phone camera’s. Phone cameras are now the Codac Instamatic’s. I think the camera vendors geared up for a digital push at the low-mid end which never materialized, because the phones stole it from under them.

Is there an answer? I don’t know, I’m not that smart. But I do know that the Digic 6, without a X-bar architecture may be hurting Canon. At least the 7 can do high speed writes to the storage card without a USB buffer.

That is why I was waiting for upgrades, but decided to jump in with both feet. My 20D and G5 have lost all of their teeth by now; and the refurbished items at Canon’s web site are priced reasonably, with a year warranty as opposed to the old 30 day.

Yahoo! I’m happy.
 
I'll tell you a little secret. My first DSLR was a Canon 20D. I had a Sigma 18-125 (29 to 200, equivalent), and we spent three days in Rome prior to a Mediterranean cruise. One day, the hotel shuttle dropped us off in the city and we spent the day wandering around and looking at the historic spots. It was a hot day, and that camera and the Sigma lens weighed a good 3+ pounds. The small bag I had was another 1.5 pounds. By noon, I was tired, my neck hurt, and I was about ready to throw the damned thing in the Tiber river. I also had a Canon S70 compact with me on the trip; which weighed about 14 ounces, and for most of the cruise I used that on our shore excursions. When I got home and looked at my shots on the PC, I found that I was getting better looking shots from the S70. So I went out and bought a Canon Pro 1. It was under 24 ounces, less than half the size and weight of the 20D and lens, and also had 8 MP, a 28-200 mm lens, and a good grip. I used that on many later trips. I did keep a DSLR for more serious efforts close to home or on car trips; but very seldom took a DSLR on a cruise after that.

The Panasonic is my current "serious" camera. With it ready to use (strap, battery, memory, hood, filter, lens cap) it weights 32.5 ounces. I have carried that all day along with it's bag, and at age 77 at that time, it was OK; but it was right on the edge of OK. and in the future I'd really like something smaller and lighter for travel. The FZ300 is 27.5 oz. and it's bag is smaller and lighter; but I'd like something even smaller and lighter than that; but still weather resistant.
 
As it has been said, in quite technical manner, you might have few things wrong. I would not call that insult, and if facts insult you, then we´re of no help for you here. Note that most people are not spending here just waiting for somebody less educated that them, and then mock him. That´s not how working forum works. Yes, you might meet with some bad trolls, but it´s not that bad here.

On the other hand, I understand your needs, and I feel your pain. I have it very similar. Physics restricts our needs to lower standards, and we need to try harder with lesser hardware, to get to our goals.

For reach, The nikon P900 is the winner, no contest. Especially for the price.

What big cameras with big lenses trade for, is the price/size/reach, and mainly image quality, which holds up for longer focal lenghts. Seems that once you´re used to the smooth detailed imagery from larger sensor, the 1/2,3" isn´t going to cut it for ya. What´s the use of the bird shot from 300ft far, blasted on the large monitor, when the image is noisy, and the bird is not detailed. So, everybody needs to pick his own compromise. I´m still on the fence. Telephoto lenses for large systems are pain...

Anyway, hope you find the closest thing for what you need.
 
tkbslc said:
You are really sticking it to Canon by buying 4-5 cameras from them now.... :)
Click to expand...
Oh, yes. I am a creature of habit. You may call it OCD if you like, I’m cool with that.

When I gave up my SX70 I did a lot of research and decided to Nikon or Canon. At the store, the salesperson offered me a 70-200mm lense, I believe with the eLAN IIe. That is how the choice was made, Nikon didn’t have a similar offer.

By the way, i Loved the eLAN’s following of my eyeball for AE and AF. Too bad they don’t have it today.

Tas
 
They say it is the photographer that makes the difference.... I agree but add that sometimes it is also the photographers editing skills that help make a difference...

I had the same camera as a person that I follow on Flickr..... she does a better job than I did....unless you pixel peep, her photos look great.... even with a small sensor-ed camera.... https://www.flickr.com/photos/annkelliott/with/40843146065/ I think she purchased an additional 1" sensor-ed camera so look at exif to see which camera took which shot....
 
HornOUBet said:
They say it is the photographer that makes the difference.... I agree but add that sometimes it is also the photographers editing skills that help make a difference...

I had the same camera as a person that I follow on Flickr..... she does a better job than I did....unless you pixel peep, her photos look great.... even with a small sensor-ed camera.... https://www.flickr.com/photos/annkelliott/with/40843146065/ I think she purchased an additional 1" sensor-ed camera so look at exif to see which camera took which shot....
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top